Military Review

Four battles of "Glory", or the effectiveness of mine-artillery positions (part 1)

81



It is known that there are two polar points of view on the actions of the battleship (squadron battleship) "Glory" during the fighting in Moonund during the First World War. Many sources call the battle path of this battleship heroic. However, there is another opinion “on the Internet” - that the battleship was used ineffectively, besides for the whole time of the battles, I never got to anyone, and therefore did not do anything heroic.

In addition, the actions of the battleship “Glory” periodically fall into the focus of discussions of a different kind. For a long time supporters and opponents of the “big fleet"They break their spears on the topic that would be more effective for the Russian Empire - the creation of linear squadrons capable of defeating the enemy in a general battle, or the construction of relatively small armadillos or monitors designed for defense in mine-artillery positions.

In the cycle of articles brought to your attention, we will try to understand how the battleship “Glory” showed itself in battles with the Kaiser fleet and how justified is such a form of naval combat as the defense of a mine-artillery position.

The Russian battleship met four times with the superior forces of the Germans in mine-artillery positions: three times in 1915 and once - in 1917, with the last meeting being fatal for Glory. Consider these "meetings" in more detail.

In the 1915 year Admiralshtab concentrated in the Baltic Sea enormous forces: 8 7 old dreadnoughts and battleships, 3 2 linear and armored cruisers, light cruisers 7, 54 destroyers and torpedo boats, submarines 3, 34 minesweeper, minelayer and auxiliary ships. With these forces the Germans were going to carry out a large-scale operation in the area of ​​the Moonsund Archipelago, defended by the Russians.

The operation had three objectives:
1) Support for German troops advancing towards Riga. To this end, the fleet was to force the Irbensky Strait and invade the Gulf of Riga, from where German ships could support the coastal flank of the advancing army.
2) Prevent the Russian fleet from supporting its army. For this purpose it was intended to destroy the Russian naval forces in the Moonsund archipelago and to set up a minefield in the strait connecting the Gulf of Finland and Riga. This strait was too shallow for dreadnoughts, but quite sufficient for the passage of gunboats, destroyers and cruisers. Having blocked it, the Germans could not fear the impact of Russian naval artillery on their ground forces in the battles for Riga and the mouth of the Dvina.
3) Destruction of the main forces of the Baltic Fleet. It was assumed that the most modern and powerful German ships (dreadnoughts and battle cruisers) would not take part in the storming of the Irbensky Strait - the old battleships of the 4 squadron were planned to be sent there. They would have acted as bait, because they gave the Russians a great temptation to bring into the sea their only brigade of the Dreadnoughts (four battleships like “Sevastopol”) that could easily crush the old German ships. But in this case, 11 battleships and battle cruisers of the High Sea Fleet would be waiting for them, who didn’t have much difficulty cutting off retreat routes to the Gulf of Finland and then destroying them. This, in the opinion of the admiral headquarters, would put an end to any active actions of the Russian fleet in the Baltic - not that they were so effective in 1914 and the beginning of 1915, but were pretty annoying to the Germans.

In accordance with the above, only the 4-I squadron was sent to the Irbensky Strait, which included, in addition to the minesweepers and the minelayer, 7 of old battleships of the dodrednaught type, accompanied by light cruisers and destroyers.

For the Russian command, this plan was not a surprise, they knew about it and were preparing for opposition. But in Moonsund there were only light forces and it was clear that they would not reflect such a large-scale invasion. Therefore, it was decided to send them to the aid of a heavy ship, which was supposed to be the "core" of Moonsund's defense. There was not much to choose from: there was no point in risking dreadnoughts, driving them into the mousetrap of the Gulf of Riga. As for the battleships, the benefits of the ships of the type “Andrew the First-Called” slightly exceeded those of “Glory” or “Tsesarevich”, while the latter, having a smaller draft, would feel much more confident among the shallow waters of the Moonsund archipelago.


The battleship "Glory" in the campaign 1914-15


As a result, the choice fell on the "Glory" and the battleship, under the cover of ships of the fleet, made the transition to Moonzund. Since the ship did not allow the draft to go directly to the Gulf of Riga from the Finnish ship, it was necessary to go around the Irbensky Strait (the channel along which the battleship passed was immediately mined). Now the naval forces of the Gulf of Riga had one battleship, four gunboats, a division of old torpedo boats, four submarines and a minelayer. Together with the crew of "Glory" Lev Mikhailovich Galler, the flagship artilleryman of the 2 Brigade of battleships, went to Moonzund.

First fight (July 26 1915 of the year).

At dawn (03.50), the Germans began to trawl the Irbensky Strait in its middle part - the dodrednauts of the Alsace and Braunschweig, as well as the cruiser Bremen and Tethys carried out direct cover of the trawling caravan. The remaining five battleships 4-th squadron kept seaward.

The first to launch fire on the enemy were the cannon "The Terrible" and "The Brave", but they were immediately driven away by the main caliber of the German battleships. However, this is a good news for the Germans ended - they got stuck in minefields and had three ships blown up, of which the minesweeper T-52 immediately sank, and the cruiser Tethys and the destroyer S-144 were forced to stop fighting - they had to be towed by the Germans "for winter apartments ". Approximately in 10.30 approached "Glory".
It would seem that now should shed more blood. Many of those who studied history The Russian imperial fleet remembers the battle of the Black Sea battleships with the German Geben battleship, when our gunners sought hits from the 90 distance and even the 100 cable, so why should it have happened differently in the Baltic?

But alas, if for the Black Sea battleships, which were to bombard the Turkish fortresses in the Bosporus, the elevation angle of 305-mm guns was reduced to 35 degrees, at which their 331,7 kg shells were flying at 110 KBT, then for the Baltic battleships only 15 degrees were recognized as sufficient vertical pickup, which, with the same guns and shells, limited their range of 80 kbt. The "Glory", whose guns were pretty badly shot, the maximum firing range was even lower - only 78 KB. But the German battleships, whose main caliber formally even somewhat inferior to "Glory" (280-mm against 305-mm), had an elevation angle of 30 degrees, which allowed them to shoot 240-kg projectiles at a distance over 100 KBT.

The advantage in long-range did not slow down - “Glory” was shot from a distance of 87,5 kb. Psychologically, it is not easy to be under fire and not shoot back, but the Russian battleship did not open fire - there was no point in showing the enemy the true range of their guns. However, it was undesirable to launch the shells invested, but falling at a significant angle from the shells, and therefore, after the German battleships fired six volleys at Slava, the battleship went beyond the range of their fire.


The battleship "Braunschweig" - the opponent of "Glory" in the battle of July 26


In this battle, "Glory" had no damage. According to the midshipman KI who served on the battleship Mazurenko:

“On her decks during shelling, small pieces of 11-inch German shells fell on the water like peas, breaking them on the water, without causing any harm to the ship or its personnel, since decks in the battle were empty "


On this, in essence, the participation of "Glory" in the July 26 battle ended. The Germans continued to trawl the barriers of the Irbensky Bay implacably, they managed to pass through two lanes of mines, but after that they hit the third barrier to 13.00. This density of minefields shocked the German command to a certain extent; they are simply not ready for this turn of events. There was practically no chance to rub the passage to the Gulf of Riga in one day, and the coal reserves (most likely on the minesweepers) were coming to an end. Therefore, the commander of the German forces, Erhard Schmidt, gave the order to curtail the operation and retreat — it became clear to him that much more serious preparation would be needed to force the Irben Strait.

Soon after 13.00, the ships that crossed the Irbensky Strait received orders to retreat, but this did not save them from loss - in 14.05, minesweeper T-58 sank and sank in mines. And then the Germans left.

What conclusions can be made on the results of the battle 26 July 1915 g? For the first time in its history, Kayserlikhmarin ran into strong minefields, which it tried to force - but it turned out that the minesweepers attracted for this were not enough. This in no case indicated the inability of the German fleet to carry out such operations — the banal lack of experience failed, and the Germans learned from their mistakes quickly.

As for the "Glory", its appearance had only a psychological effect - the Germans saw that they were confronted by a single Russian battleship, and made various guesses about why the ship did not open fire and did not join the battle. Perhaps the presence of "Glory" was an additional argument in favor of stopping the operation, but certainly one thing - this time the German squadron was stopped by dense minefields blocking the Irbensky Strait, but by no means the defense of these barriers by the fleet.

Nevertheless, the psychological effect of the presence of a heavy Russian ship, ready to engage in combat under the cover of mines, turned out to be very great. The commander of the German naval forces in the Baltic (E. Schmidt commanded the ships at sea), Grand Admiral Prince Heinrich attributed to the destruction of "Glory" great moral importance and even the Kaiser himself demanded to sink the Russian battleship "submarines."

Second fight (3 August 1915 of the year)

The next attempt to break the Germans made only a week later. At the same time, the composition of the breakthrough group, which was to pave the way to the Gulf of Riga, underwent a qualitative change - instead of the old battleships of the 4 squadron, the dreadnoughts Nassau and Pozen had to come into the picture. The rhombic location of the main caliber 280-mm artillery on these battleships is difficult to recognize as optimal, but the ability to fire in any direction (including straight ahead) of at least six barrels (of eight out of sharp corners) gave an overwhelming advantage to two such ships over the "Glory" in an artillery battle, even if the distance between the opponents allows the Russians to fire.



The main caliber of the battleships Alsace and Braunschweig, which had fallen on the July Glory 26, represented the 280-mm SK L / 40 cannon, firing 240-kg projectiles with an initial speed of 820 m / s, while on Nassau "and" Pozeny "installed more modern 280-mm guns SK L / 45, throwing 302-kg shells with a speed of 855 m / s. Four 305 mm Slava guns fired 331,7 kg with projectiles with an initial speed of 792 m / s. Thus, dreadnought weapons in their combat capabilities came very close to the main caliber of Glory, but if a Russian battleship could fight two or four 305-mm guns, then Nassau and Posen could shoot 12-16 280 together -mm guns, surpassing the Russian battleship in the number of trunks 3-4 times. As for the firing range of the German dreadnoughts, the information about it in various sources is different, but in any case it exceeded 100 KB.

The Russians also tried to prepare for future battles. The biggest problem of the Russian ship was the insufficient range of its guns, and with this it was necessary to do something. Of course, there was no way to upgrade the gun turrets, having increased the angle of vertical guidance directly in Moonsund, but L.M. Haller suggested another option - to take water into the armadillo hull and thereby create an artificial roll in 3 degrees. This was supposed to increase the range of Russian guns on 8 KBT. Why stopped at exactly three degrees?

First, with a roll over 3 degrees, the rate of fire of the main caliber guns dropped dramatically, due to the difficulties encountered with loading the guns. Secondly, the battleship had to move along the barriers, changing the direction of movement from north to south, and with a roll of more than 3 degrees, the web interface took a lot of time. At the same time, in order to make the ship roll in 3 degrees, it was enough to take 300 tons of water (100 tons in three compartments), which took no more than 10-15 minutes. And, finally, thirdly - when the 5 degrees were inclined, the armor belt completely came out of the water and did not protect the newly formed “waterline”. What was fraught with, for example, a direct hit by enemy shells in the boiler rooms or engine rooms of the ship. The “technology” of the inclining of the battleship was tested and worked out before the second attack of the Kaiser fleet, but it must be understood - even in such a state the battleship could not shoot anymore on the 85 cables and thus lost much to Nassau and Posen.

This time, the Germans did not seek to start early in the morning - the order to advance to the Irben position on Slava was received at 12.19 and in 13.45 the battleship was at the lighthouse Tserel. In the west, there appeared numerous smokes of the German squadron - the signalmen of “Glory” counted 45-50 smokes. The battleship went south, and its speed was reduced first to 12, and then to 6 nodes. As soon as the distance between Slava and the German dreadnoughts was reduced to 120 KBT, the Germans opened fire, giving 6 volleys to no avail: all of them went short under the distance from 1,5 to 15 KBT from the Russian battleship.

In response, Slava retreated slightly to the east, in the direction opposite to the Germans (they moved from west to east). Here the battleship turned north, took the necessary amount of water and, having received a roll in 3'30 hail, gave two volleys "for checking range finders and warming guns." But both of them lay down with big failures, so the fire was “crushed”. At 15, the clock turned south again and skewed the ship. In essence, at this time, "Glory" walked back and forth across the course of the German ships breaking through the Irben Strait.

By 16 hours, the distance to the German battleships was reduced to 105-110 cable, but the Russian guns still could not send their projectiles to any enemy ships and therefore were silent. Nassau opened fire and fired nine volleys that went very close to Glory. The battleship, unable to respond, again retreated to the east. But suddenly, on Slava, they noticed a suitable target for their guns - it turns out that two German destroyers were trying to get to Riga, clinging to the southern bank of the Irbenko Strait. In 16.50, Slava immediately turned to the west, towards a German squadron bursting through and (as far as the distance allowed it) opened fire on the destroyers from its six-inch towers. The German destroyers immediately retreated, and the two Germanic Dreadnoughts struck the approaching "Glory". Such a steadfast "attention" of the 280-mm guns was absolutely not necessary for the Russian ship, especially since it could not respond with fire. "Glory" retreated, having spent about 5 minutes or a bit more under the fire of "Nassau" and "Posen". During this time, the enemy battleships had time to make at least 10 volleys.

But in 17.30, the Glory turned back to the west and went to a rapprochement - in 17.45, its guns opened fire on the minesweeper, and then on the light cruiser Bremen (on the Glory, they mistakenly assumed that they were shooting at the Prince Adalbert cruiser ). "Nassau" and "Posen" immediately responded, and their volleys went to flight, then undershoots, that is, "Glory" was within the effective fire of their guns. Five minutes "Glory" fought, and then turned back to the east and retreated - but another 7 minutes German dreadnoughts beat on her.This time, in order to be able to fire at a German cruiser that had come ahead, the Slava was forced to substitute itself under enemy fire with 10-12 minutes for five minutes.

But as soon as Slava went beyond the fire of Nassau and Posen (tentatively on 18.00), she immediately turned around and again went to meet the enemy. Some ambiguity arises here, because after this reversal of “Glory” no one shot, and the Russian battleship was able to open fire only after half an hour, at 18.30, at “some vessel,” most likely a minesweeper.

Perhaps the whole thing is that around this very time the Germans stopped trying to break through, turned around and went west. If we assume that "Glory" pursued them, trying not to enter the zone of fire of the dreadnoughts, and fired at the lagging behind enemy ship, as soon as such an opportunity presented itself, then everything falls into place. But it should be borne in mind that this is only the author's guess, the exact time of the Germans turning to the west is unknown to him. Only a few smoke remained on the horizon from 19.00 from the Germans, and Slava received orders to return to Ahrensburg, where she arrived at 23.00.

The August 3 battle ended, and this time Glory played a much more significant role than in the previous contact with the enemy, which took place on July 26. It is difficult to say how right Vinogradov is, asserting:

“The stumbling block was definitely in“ Glory ”- during the day of August 3 it forced the minesweepers to retreat more than once”


After all, before the German retreat, "Glory" managed to fire a minesweeper only once (on 17.45). But there is no doubt that the presence of the Russian battleship, which constantly “loomed” before the German detachment, forced the sweeping caravan to behave extremely cautiously, not “protruding” beyond the protection of “Nassau” and “Posen”. The Germans could not know the real range of Russian guns. It is reasonable to assume that the actions of “Glory” significantly reduced the speed of trawling the Irben position and thus did not allow the Germans to pass it during August 3.

The battleship was fired four times under the fire of the Nassau and Pozen dreadnoughts. In each of the four cases, briefly, from 5 to 12, maybe 15 minutes. Someone will remember that during the Russo-Japanese war the battleships fought for hours, but it should be understood that the fire of the German artillery from the 90-110 cable course was much more dangerous than the XiHumiro Togo in the same Tsushima. At long distances, heavy shells fall at a considerable angle to the horizon, and are able to easily penetrate the decks of old battleships, not intended to hold blows of similar strength.

In this case, the Dreadnoughts of the First World War were equipped with rangefinders and fire control systems, an order of magnitude superior to what the gunners of the Russo-Japanese war possessed. Therefore, it is not surprising that the commander of the Glory did not want to expose his ship to the risk of obtaining decisive damage for nothing, without having the slightest chance of damaging the enemy.

But in those cases when there appeared a chance to cause damage to the Kaiserlmarine ships, the Russian battleship did not hesitate for a second. Having barely noticed the possibility of attacking German destroyers (in 16.50) or firing a minesweeper and cruiser (17.45), the "Glory" immediately went towards a rapprochement with the enemy - under the fire of dreadnoughts.

There is no doubt that if the 305 tower guns of the Glory guns had, according to the model and likeness of the Black Sea battleships, the maximum angle of elevation 35 degrees, which allowed shooting at the 110 cab, the Glory battles with the German 26 fleet in July and 3 August would be much fiercer. But Russian sailors (for the umpteenth time!) Were sent into battle with criminally unfit weapons. It is difficult to find an excuse for this - a separate practical detachment of the Black Sea (led by the battleship Rostislav) under the flag of Rear Admiral GF Tsyvinsky demonstrated effective shooting at distances up to 100 cables inclusive in the 1907 year. In the next, XFUMX, the initiative of GF. Tsyvinsky was warmly approved not only by the Navy Minister, but also by the Emperor-Emperor. And, nevertheless, in 1908, Slava was forced to fight, having a maximum firing range below 1915 cable!

In essence, "Glory" was forced to withstand significantly (at times) superior enemy forces, and even with an unsuitable materiel. Nevertheless, even in such unfavorable (if not to say hopeless) conditions for themselves, the Russian sailors did not become confused, but tried to do everything that was possible, without fear of improvising.

Of course, it is difficult to expect high performance from firing at extreme distances, and even with an artificially induced roll of the ship.

In total, in the 3 battle of August, Slava spent 35 305-mm and 20 152-mm shells. It should be noted that 4 or even 8 305-mm projectiles were fired towards the enemy “to check range finders and warm shafts”, but in fact, more likely to raise the team’s morale. This is about the first two salvos of "Glory", which formed with a large undershoot - unfortunately, the sources do not indicate whether they were full volleys (i.e., of all four 305-mm trunks at once) or half ( two trunks), as usual, armadillos were shot. Accordingly, it is not possible to establish the number of shells in these volleys. You can, of course, talk about the "in vain discarded shells", but I remind you - at the first fire contact, although "Glory" was out of reach of German guns, the Germans gave not six, but as many as six volleys along the Russian battleship.

Thus, we can say that effectively, that is, with the chances of hitting the enemy, "Glory" released 27 or 31 305-mm projectiles. Let us take as a standard of accuracy the effectiveness of the German heavy artillery in the Jutland battle: by spending 3 497 280-305-mm caliber shells, the Germans achieved 121 hits, which left 3,4% of the total number of shells fired.

Focusing on this percentage of hits, we conclude that the maximum of what can be expected from "Glory" with the current consumption of 305-mm projectiles is the only hit to the enemy. But given that:
1) The range finders and fire control devices of the German battleships were more perfect than they were on the Glory.
2) The Slava projectile 27-31 expended by firing three different ships (the minesweeper, the Bremen cruiser, and then the minesweeper again), that is, the Russian battleship spent an average of no more than 10 shells on one target. Is it a lot or a little? Suffice it to recall that the newest battle cruiser Derflinger, which had a significantly better materiel than Glory, and who had a Kaiser prize for excellent shooting before the war, in the battle of the Jutland battle could only shoot at the Princess Royal on the 6 salvo, by spending a 24 projectile. This, by the way, happened when no one shot at Derflinger at all.
3) In any particular case, the combat situation has its own individual characteristics: visibility, etc. It is of interest that in battle 3 of August two Germanic dreadnought, possessing the best material part and having spent a lot more projectiles on the "Glory" than the Russian battleship released, could not achieve a single hit

In accordance with the foregoing, it can be stated that the absence of “Glory” hits in the 3 battle of August cannot serve as evidence of the poor skills of the Russian artillerymen.

Продолжение следует ...
Author:
81 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Alex_59
    Alex_59 20 November 2017 15: 47 New
    17
    Hooray! Again, there is something to read)))
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      20 November 2017 16: 04 New
      16
      Quote: Alex_59
      Hooray! Again, there is something to read)))

      Thank:)))) hi
      In the near future there will be many articles :)
      1. Rurikovich
        Rurikovich 20 November 2017 18: 32 New
        +5
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        In the near future there will be many articles :)

        Finally ... waited for the same ... winked smile
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          20 November 2017 18: 54 New
          +4
          Quote: Rurikovich
          Finally ... waited for the same ...

          Monster! Incidentally, I’m sitting without work again, so there’s time, but you, znachitstsa, rejoice ?! angry laughing
          1. Rurikovich
            Rurikovich 20 November 2017 19: 06 New
            +5
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Incidentally, I’m sitting without work again, therefore, there’s time,

            belay This, of course, is not buzzing crying I can only sincerely wish to find work again yes
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            and you znachitstsa rejoice ?!

            Not out of malice, but out of ignorance recourse request
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Monster!

            And I am glad to see you! drinks fellow
            And to be honest, in any situation, you need to extract pluses from the minuses in order to minimize losses, even if only psychologically yes
            A plus for us will be a larger appearance of your interesting articles, but if you find work again, we will understand yes Any insensitive blockheads which request
            So, Andrey Nikolaevich, Good luck with your work hi
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              20 November 2017 19: 23 New
              +3
              Nah, I’m offended to the depths of my soul and challenge you to a duel :))) Weapons - snowballs, from a distance of 100 meters and to death :))))) laughing drinks
              1. Rurikovich
                Rurikovich 20 November 2017 20: 41 New
                +3
                belay
                I can’t accept the challenge from my respected opponent, so I throw my 1m3 of snow (which we haven’t yet repeat ) at your feet and admit defeat yes
                Well, for respect drinks hi laughing
              2. Alex_59
                Alex_59 21 November 2017 08: 17 New
                +3
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                The weapon is snowballs, from a distance of 100 meters to death :)))))

                Do you already have something to make snowballs in Chelyabinsk from there? We only have here if mud snowballs can ...
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  21 November 2017 12: 24 New
                  +4
                  Quote: Alex_59
                  Do you already have something to make snowballs in Chelyabinsk from there?

                  No. laughing It fell a bit, but it melted
            2. Serg65
              Serg65 21 November 2017 10: 10 New
              +6
              Greetings, my Belarusian friend hi
              Quote: Rurikovich
              in any position, it is necessary to extract pluses from the minuses in order to minimize losses, even if only psychologically

              what Certainly, the Belarusian parliament has lost a lot from the absence of you among them! How bent then, the daredevil !!! good drinks
              1. Rurikovich
                Rurikovich 21 November 2017 19: 51 New
                +2
                Quote: Serg65
                How bent then, daredevil!

                Internship wink laughing drinks communicating with different people in different situations repeat
                By my kindness of soul, it happens that they cry in a veil, therefore, science to help in difficult times gains experience! repeat
                Quote: Serg65
                Greetings my Belarusian friend hi

                Hello, boyar !!! drinks hi
          2. Serg65
            Serg65 21 November 2017 10: 07 New
            +6
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            By the way, I’m again without work

            laughing Campaign Andrew, this your fun has a certain cyclical .....
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              21 November 2017 12: 15 New
              +1
              That's for sure. Alas, this time, as they say, "Himself ... stupid" And finally spoiled my resume completely.
  2. Monarchist
    Monarchist 20 November 2017 16: 02 New
    +5
    Andrey, thank you for the story. I can not compete with you in the knowledge of the fleet, but I want to express my opinion. 1 is puzzling that the Russian command did not bother to modernize the guns on the Ballotte, or maybe these were only on the Glory?
    Geller voluntarily went to serve the Bolsheviks, became rear admiral, and in 1948 he was arrested by the NKVD on the charge that he was almost a traitor. Apparently, his little “crushed” and he ended up in a psychiatric hospital, where he died. A monument was later erected to him in Kazan, but it is not known where he is buried.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      20 November 2017 16: 14 New
      +4
      Quote: Monarchist
      Andrey, thank you for the story.

      You're welcome!
      Quote: Monarchist
      It is puzzling that the Russian command did not bother to modernize the guns on the Ballot, or maybe these were only on the "Glory"?

      Everything was the same on Tsesarevich, but ships of the Andean the First-Called type already had a vertical angle of 35 degrees and fired 110 kb with a conventional projectile. Perhaps that is why they were chosen to be left on the Finnish defense? Who knows ... One thing is for sure - this is not how things are done.
      Quote: Monarchist
      perhaps it made sense to supplement the battleship with gunboats so that they “looked after” the minesweepers?

      There were 4 gunboats, but what's the use of them? Indeed, in order to shoot at minesweepers, being outside the fire of enemy dreadnought, it was necessary to shoot at 110 kbt at least, i.e. it would be necessary to have the same 305 mm guns on them. And this is no longer a gunboat :)
      Quote: Monarchist
      Geller voluntarily went to serve the Bolsheviks, became rear admiral, and in 1948 he was arrested by the NKVD on the charge that he was almost a traitor. Apparently, his little “crushed” and he ended up in a psychiatric hospital, where he died.

      Yes, everything is very difficult there with the fate of this person. But, in any case, in Moonsund he honestly performed his duty
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 21 November 2017 10: 22 New
        10
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        One thing is for sure - things are not done like that.

        Andrei, remember how hard the Maritime Department knocked out money to complete the old battleships and build new battleships !!! And if the "Tsushima department" also hinted at modernization, the Duma screamers would have gone to excrement!
        repeat Pardonte ... with all my heart with a return drinks
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          21 November 2017 12: 16 New
          +3
          Quote: Serg65
          Andrei, remember how hard the Maritime Department knocked out money to complete the old battleships and build new battleships !!!

          Yes, that's right, but then Grigorovich came and became easier. And then it would be possible ...
          1. Serg65
            Serg65 21 November 2017 12: 42 New
            +5
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            And then it would be possible ...

            laughing Andrew, what are you right word ...
            It’s the same as Ukrainians in 93 grabbed Lobov and marked him as the flagship, but the chieftain dumbed Kirov and had to write in hetmans and raised the brady pen on him recourse
            Also, with the advent of Grigorovich (and before the war there were only 5 years left), an acute question arose about building a new one and not be distracted by the old one because the Duma werewolves and they could hack into new estimates yes
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              21 November 2017 12: 50 New
              +4
              Yes, I understand everything :) But there is a simple nuance - here comes Grigorovich, and we have 4 ships for the TsMAP defense, not only the old ones, of which 2 are also without long-range guns. Well this is a mess. And yet, again - the glories were discussed before the war a lot. The towers there are 203 mm, or something else ... But to the most important thing - alas.
              1. Rurikovich
                Rurikovich 21 November 2017 19: 55 New
                +1
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                And yet again - the glories were discussed before the war a lot. The towers there are 203 mm, or something else.

                Like the former Eagle, the Japanese Iwami? what
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  21 November 2017 20: 06 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Rurikovich
                  Ipa of the former "Eagle" - Japanese "Iwami"?

                  Worse:)))
                  1. Rurikovich
                    Rurikovich 21 November 2017 21: 11 New
                    +2
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    Worse:)))

                    Really belay .....
                    No aesthetics no
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      21 November 2017 21: 20 New
                      +3
                      Quote: Rurikovich
                      Really

                      I don’t even want to say anything. By the way, then in my opinion just cocaine was in great circulation ... or was it later?
                      1. Rurikovich
                        Rurikovich 21 November 2017 21: 29 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        By the way, then in my opinion just cocaine was in great circulation ... or was it later?

                        laughing good It doesn’t matter anymore!
                        If these projects have taken place, then post-Tsushima syndrome is more likely what
                        Good evening! hi
                  2. DimerVladimer
                    DimerVladimer 22 November 2017 13: 10 New
                    +3
                    Such a “modernization” would be very cheap.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 20 November 2017 18: 27 New
      10
      Quote: Monarchist
      1 causes bewilderment that the Russian command did not bother to modernize the guns on the Ballot, or maybe these were only on the "Glory"

      The most plausible option is the notorious budget savings. One can recall how all the pre-war plans for Bayanich’s modernization were hacked down (and when the CRs were still under construction), according to which KRs instead of useless 75 mm received either 10 * 102 mm, or 6 * 120 mm, or 4 * 152 mm . No money. No money. ICH, in 1916 still had to strengthen weapons.
      Or how they slaughtered the Svetlan tower project - because the fourth tower was approved at Izmail.
      Upgrading the BS GK with an increase in the IOC is not an expensive thing. There are not only new sectors and cutouts in the armor, but also a recalculation of reinforcements in connection with the growth of the vertical component of the dynamic load at high UVN. Remember - what problems were there at the BS of the Peresvetychev GC when firing with an air-gun level of more than 20 degrees.
      Quote: Monarchist
      perhaps it made sense to supplement the battleship with gunboats so that they “looked after” the minesweepers?

      So ... the problem is that these CRs should work outside the effective fire of the enemy’s LC. Otherwise, these CLs will have to cover up - but there is nothing to do. By the way, in 1917 in Irbeni they tried to use the Terrible and the Brave KL to fight against the small German ships - everything ended up coming forester German LC and KL were forced to withdraw.
      And in order to work beyond the bounds of effective LC fire, not only long-range guns are needed, but also the corresponding SUAO.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        20 November 2017 18: 57 New
        +4
        Quote: Alexey RA
        The most plausible option - the notorious budget savings

        So Yes. I would also think about the lack of production capacities due to their excessive load, but they probably were
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Upgrading the BS GK with an increase in the IOC is not an expensive thing.

        Oh well. But here it was just spent was definitely.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 20 November 2017 19: 39 New
          +4
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          Oh well. But here it was just spent was definitely.

          Duc ... If I knew where to fall, I would lay straws.
          Who, before the war, could have guessed that Glory and Citizen would become the most warring BF ships?
          Moreover, there is one more problem - both of these EDBs were actively used as training to prepare new teams for the "big pots" of the fleet.
          1. Rurikovich
            Rurikovich 20 November 2017 19: 47 New
            +3
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Moreover, there is one more problem - both of these EDBs were actively used as training to prepare new teams for the "big pots" of the fleet.

            There is a parallel with Tsushima - three BRMOs of the Admiral Apraksin type were essentially experienced crews, but useless due to the deterioration of the guns, because were training workhorses what
          2. vovan_s62
            vovan_s62 21 November 2017 05: 51 New
            0
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Oh well. But here it was just spent was definitely.

            Duc ... If I knew where to fall, I would lay straws.
            Who, before the war, could have guessed that Glory and Citizen would become the most warring BF ships?
            Moreover, there is one more problem - both of these EDBs were actively used as training to prepare new teams for the "big pots" of the fleet.
        2. Amurets
          Amurets 20 November 2017 23: 28 New
          +3
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          So Yes. I would also think about the lack of production capacities due to their excessive load, but they probably were

          Obukhov Steel was loaded with orders above the roof. The plant in Tsaritsyno (later the Barricades) was just starting to be built. On the Black Sea battleships, EMNIP, "Catherine the Great" had to transfer spare machines and bodies of tools of the Baltic battleships. I will not anticipate the author, in the book of S. Vinogradov the battleship "Glory" is about those changes that made in the towers of the main caliber of "Glory" in the winter of 1916-1917.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            21 November 2017 12: 51 New
            +2
            Quote: Amurets
            Obukhov Steel was loaded with orders above the roof. The plant in Tsaritsyno (later the Barricades) was just starting to be built.

            So this was not necessary, a little metal was required there. Baltic on its own would cope without problems
            1. Amurets
              Amurets 21 November 2017 13: 19 New
              +2
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              So this was not necessary, a little metal was required there. Baltic on its own would cope without problems

              You forgot the naval bureaucracy. You referred to S. Vinogradov. Then we must remember the initiatives of O.O. Richter about replacing artillery of anti-mine caliber and you yourself noted this. Both S. Vinogradov and R. Melnikov write that all the initiatives of the ship's commander O.O. Richter were successfully blocked by the Ministry of the Sea.
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                21 November 2017 13: 23 New
                +3
                Quote: Amurets
                You forgot the naval bureaucracy

                I have not forgotten her, I resent her. It is clear that since Glory was left without a normal elevation angle, there were reasons for this. I’m saying that these reasons were not objective, but subjective. Technically it was possible, and funds could be found, but here
                1. Amurets
                  Amurets 21 November 2017 13: 26 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  Technically it was possible, and funds could be found, but here

                  They didn’t want to. Why does the official have extra worries.
  3. badens1111
    badens1111 20 November 2017 17: 18 New
    +1
    “that the absence of Slava’s hits in the battle on August 3 cannot serve as evidence of the poor training of the Russian artillerymen.” - This also speaks of the general training of the crew and the commander of the ship, since he didn’t expose the ship to defeat.
    It’s bad, of course, that the power of weapons wasn’t used because of some obscure regulations, on the Black Sea Fleet so, on the Baltic Fleet otherwise.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      20 November 2017 18: 06 New
      +2
      Quote: badens1111
      since he didn’t expose the ship to defeat.

      ?? Four times substituted on August 3
      Quote: badens1111
      It’s bad, of course, that the power of weapons is not used due to some obscure regulations

      What regulations? :))) Range 78 kb, that's the whole regulation They couldn’t shoot to the enemy
      1. Andy
        Andy 20 November 2017 19: 03 New
        +3
        it is thought that the defeat is not meant to be in the fire zone, but evasion from hits. hardly glory did not try to make zigzags
        1. dustycat
          dustycat 27 November 2017 14: 39 New
          +1
          You do not take into account the maneuverability of Glory.
          This destroyer or cruiser has a reserve of speed and speed of the maneuver.
          Glory did not have this reserve.
          All that Glory could do was slow course maneuvers shooting down sighting no more than 0,5 kb between salvos.
          The risk was great.
          Especially after getting into the plug.
      2. badens1111
        badens1111 20 November 2017 19: 29 New
        0
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        ?? Four times substituted on August 3

        Framed .. and hit, different things? Framed because of the imperfection of artillery .. then yes, you can interpret it like that. Evading artillery fire, is it more true?
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        What regulations? :))) Range 78 kb, that's the whole regulation

        Well, he put it wrong, you yourself wrote in an article on the Black Sea Fleet that you entered elevation angles such that you refused to the BF, what did you think ??
        And because of this, and all the failure in the overall actions of the battleship ..
  4. Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 20 November 2017 18: 27 New
    +6
    Wonderful fellow A plus! good
    I have only one question regarding the decision on “Glory”. Driven for a normal displacement of 12900 tons. for “Tsesarevich” the draft is 7,9 m (in full load 8.4 m), for “Glory” it is 14400 t. the draft is 8,5 m. Overload will be somewhere around 0.3 - 0.4 m. For "Andrew the First-Called" the normal displacement according to the specification is 16600 tons, and the total displacement is 18500 (1914). Draft for the first indicator was 8,24, but more real for 1914 was 8,9 m. of nose and 8,5 m. poop! The difference is up to 0,5m. the weather does not. Moreover, no one interfered with underloading “Andrejka” with “Pavlik” coal and getting the same acceptable 8,3 - 8,5 m. precipitation necessary to overcome the Moonsund channel. Especially in the Gulf of Riga, full bunkers are not really needed. Then they would get quite long-range weapons to confront even the Nassau. The benefits of artillery outweigh the inconvenience with coal when crossing the strait. So this problem is solved.
    In my personal opinion, the least valuable were sent to the Gulf of Riga - the old ones, with the guns shot to Slava "and" Tsesarevich "(later), while telling a tale about the low draft of these EDBs.
    It was not a sediment, but the fact that if the Hochseeflotte had a hypothetical breakthrough through the TsMAP, the Amperators would have been another formal dreadnought to help Sevastopol. That’s why they didn’t risk it request
    I repeat, purely my personal opinion hi
    PS. Finally, a normal article cycle is drawn !!! fellow good drinks hi
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      20 November 2017 19: 11 New
      +5
      Quote: Rurikovich
      but more real for 1914 was 8,9 m. of drift and 8,5 m. poop!

      To be a pedant, in 1914 they indicated 8,84 nose and 8,53 stern, for 18 500 tons and 8,9 and 8,53 MGSH wrote in 1917, for 18 580 tons, but this, of course, is unprincipled.
      Quote: Rurikovich
      for "Glory" in 14400t. the specified draft in 8,5m.

      I would remember Vinogradov here, he indicated 8,35 m with a displacement of 14
      Quote: Rurikovich
      Moreover, no one interfered with underloading “Andrejka” with “Pavlik” coal and getting the same acceptable 8,3 - 8,5 m. precipitation

      So it was and no one bothered to unload Glory :))))
      Quote: Rurikovich
      The benefits of artillery outweigh the inconvenience with coal when crossing the strait.

      So in the 1915th and Glory would not have passed
      Quote: Rurikovich
      In my personal opinion, the least valuable were sent to the Gulf of Riga - the old ones, with the guns shot to Slava "and" Tsesarevich "(later), while telling a tale about the low draft of these EDBs.

      Yes, I, in general, have a similar opinion. I believe that the idea of ​​less precipitation was, but not decisive, but mostly "On you, God, that we are not worth it."
      Quote: Rurikovich
      PS. Finally, a normal article cycle is drawn !!!

      Thank you! hi
      1. Rurikovich
        Rurikovich 20 November 2017 19: 24 New
        +4
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        in 1914, 8,84 noses and 8,53 sterns were indicated

        I rounded request
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        indicated 8,35 m with a displacement of 14

        Unprincipled wink
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Nobody bothered to unload Glory and this:

        So they’ll have “Andryushki” yes "Glory" was essentially an old useful sacrifice request
        Actually, as my mother says: if you want to poop, you will lower your pants yes
        Therefore, I consider problems with upsetting unprincipled. If there was a desire, they would have extended the more powerful Andreiku and Pavlik to the Gulf of Riga easily. Well, if you didn’t really want to, then a lot of excuses appeared, the most important of which is sediment repeat
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        "On you, God, that we are worthless."

        "You know what - take everything, I'll draw it for myself" request
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          20 November 2017 22: 23 New
          +7
          Quote: Rurikovich
          So they’ll have “Andryushki”

          I’ll finish the “Verb”, I’ll sit down for the adventures of the battleship “Andrei from Chelya” ... uhhh ... “Andrew the First-Called” in Moonsund laughing
  5. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 20 November 2017 19: 10 New
    +3
    But Russian sailors (for the umpteenth time!) Were sent into battle with criminally unfit weapons. It is difficult to justify this - A separate practical detachment of the Black Sea (led by the battleship Rostislav) under the flag of Rear Admiral G.F. Tsyvinsky demonstrated effective shooting at distances of up to 100 cables, inclusive, back in 1907. In the next, 1908, G.F. Tsyvinsky was warmly approved not only by the Minister of the Sea, but also by the Emperor. And, nevertheless, in 1915 the Glory was forced to fight, with a maximum firing range below 80 cables!

    To "Glory" to shoot at 100 kbt - it was necessary to initially lay 35 degrees of UVN in the project "Borodintsev". And then, I am afraid, there would be no one to form 2 TOEs from. Because of the problems when shooting with an air-blast gun of 20-30 degrees, the RIF drank a full spoon already at 10 "BS GK.
    In addition, who knew that the second oldest EDB BF will be the most active in a future war. what They planned a battle at the TsMAP with the participation of the Ganguts and Andreev, and not the butting in the Gulf of Riga. Actually, the state of the BO of the Moonsund Archipelago speaks of this best of all - 12 "appeared there only at the end of the war, and before that Irbena was covered by a 6" battery.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      20 November 2017 19: 22 New
      +2
      Quote: Alexey RA
      To "Glory" to shoot at 100 kbt - it was necessary to initially lay 35 degrees of UVN in the project "Borodintsev". And then, I am afraid, there would be no one to form 2 TOEs from. Because of the problems when shooting with an air-blast gun of 20-30 degrees, the RIF drank a full spoon already at 10 "BS GK.

      Nevertheless, the plant reported on its readiness to put towers on Potemkin already in 1902, and the EMNIP did not have much trouble with the Black Sea in this regard. But in general - yes, the matter is not simple. But even in the post-war Glory, they could have gone too far, as I think
    2. Rurikovich
      Rurikovich 20 November 2017 19: 39 New
      +3
      Quote: Alexey RA
      To "Glory" to shoot at 100 kbt - it was necessary to initially lay 35 degrees of UVN in the project "Borodintsev". And then, I am afraid, there would be no one to form 2 TOEs from.

      SUAO and the battle distance for these SUAO did not imply such requirements at the time of the construction of the "Borodino". According to the estimated combat distance, the 12 "/ 40 sample of 1896 fully complied with the requirements (for those times). Only with the advent of more modern SUAO and dreadnoughts, under which they appeared, there was a need to increase the firing range, which already made tower installations" Glory "and" Tsesarevich "obsolete request Yes, to whom I tell this - you yourself know it better than me smile
      Quote: Alexey RA
      In addition, who knew that the second oldest EDB BF will be the most active in a future war

      God what request And just “Glory” became so active due to its age laughingtherefore low value request Therefore, it is thrown into the jaws of the Germans. Although who knew that they would not trample on the TsMAP, but would break from the back door? what
      Quote: Alexey RA
      They planned a battle at the TsMAP with the participation of the Ganguts and Andreev, and not the butting in the Gulf of Riga.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 20 November 2017 19: 48 New
        +3
        Quote: Rurikovich
        SUAO and the battle distance for these SUAO did not imply such requirements at the time of the construction of the "Borodino". According to the estimated combat distance, the 12 "/ 40 sample of 1896 fully met the requirements (for those times).

        Heh heh heh ... nevertheless, BSh with 12 "HK at 35 degrees of IHF have already been done - and you, PMSM, know for whom. smile
        Moreover, even in the Baltic Sea, EDBs were built with large HC-GK - the ones that later suffered from their own volleys (but already in the Far East).
        1. Rurikovich
          Rurikovich 20 November 2017 19: 59 New
          +2
          Quote: Alexey RA
          nevertheless, a BSh with a 12 "HK at 35 degrees of IHF has already been done - and you, PMSM, know for whom. smile

          This was already after the Borodinians, such BS were designed from 1903 and the Andreiki became their first owners. But the "Glory" went with guns -5- + 15 repeat that affected in the 15th year. A “Potemkin" received such BS (-5 - +35) to combat the fortifications of the Bosphorus
          Well, these
          Quote: Alexey RA
          even in the Baltic, EDBs were built with large HC GVs - the ones that later suffered from their own volleys (but already in the Far East).

          rather experimental, for certain tasks of the EBR-KR type "Relight"
  6. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 20 November 2017 19: 20 New
    +2
    the creation of linear squadrons capable of defeating the enemy in a general battle, or the construction of relatively small armadillos or monitors designed for defense in mine-artillery positions.
    So what doubts? A trinity was built, but just didn’t get to the MA position.
  7. doktorkurgan
    doktorkurgan 20 November 2017 21: 01 New
    +5
    Sincere article. We look forward to continuing.
    PS: I remembered Pikulevsky "Moonzund" ... With all the historical jambs and the escalation of drama - all the same, IMHO, the best thing about the WWII in the Baltic was written from the hoodlie ...
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      20 November 2017 22: 19 New
      +4
      Quote: doktorkurgan
      Sincere article. We look forward to continuing.

      Thank you, tomorrow I will post the second part, I think that this week will be on the main
      Quote: doktorkurgan
      I remembered Pikulevsky "Moonzund" ... With all the historical jambs and the escalation of drama - all the same, IMHO, the best thing about WWII in the Baltic was written from the hoodlite ...

      Well .... Pikul, as a writer (not a historian), generally speaking, it’s not bad, but what is written about the WWII is not enough ...
  8. Kibb
    Kibb 20 November 2017 21: 08 New
    +2
    Andrew. thanks interestingly, while I ran diagonally - as far as I understood a little interlude before the second part of the previous article, I’ll get to the computer, read it carefully and most likely there will be questions
    Threat shells at 28cm / 45 302 kg
    1. Rurikovich
      Rurikovich 20 November 2017 21: 37 New
      +3
      Quote: Kibb
      Shells at 28cm / 45 302 kg

      So the author pointed it out request for guns "Posen". U.B. Muzhenikov’s monograph on Nassau-type battleships even shows two weights for SKL / 45 gun shells - 305 kg and 302,4 kg according to Conwey.
      So I do not see the error yes
      It may have confused the indication of 240 kg of shells for guns of the Armadillo type "Braunschweig", so the article also specifically states hi
      1. Kibb
        Kibb 20 November 2017 21: 43 New
        +2
        I say, read diagonally hi I really do not like from the phone, it seemed that we are talking about Nassau, thanks wink
    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      20 November 2017 22: 18 New
      +2
      Quote: Kibb
      Andrew. thanks interesting

      Glad I liked it!
      Quote: Kibb
      as I understand it, a little interlude before the second part of the previous article

      You are right, but here everything is interconnected - we will analyze the Moonsund and based on the conclusions made I will continue to move on the concept of the fleet :))) Although ... the cruising concept can be considered before the end of Moonsund, on the other hand.
      Quote: Kibb
      Threat shells at 28cm / 45 302 kg

      Yes, sir! hi
      1. Kibb
        Kibb 20 November 2017 23: 07 New
        +1
        By the way, I read it normally smile There is only one question posed in the title. And how effective is the battle on MAP? But for some reason I think that I know the answer to it.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          21 November 2017 09: 29 New
          +1
          Quote: Kibb
          There is only one question posed in the title. And how effective is the battle on MAP?

          I will not anticipate events :)
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 21 November 2017 10: 11 New
          +6
          Quote: Kibb
          There is only one question posed in the title. And how effective is the battle on MAP?

          And have we ever had a fight at the MAP? On a full-fledged MAP - with coastal artillery, minefields and ships? But then all the time it somehow somehow turns out that either there are mines, there are ships - there is no coastal artillery. Either there are mines, there is artillery - there are no ships. Or everything is there - but the enemy did not come. smile
          1. Kibb
            Kibb 21 November 2017 10: 24 New
            +2
            Well, indeed, if you tracked the actions on the MAP in the 15th and 17th years, then there wasn’t, but it wouldn’t matter how much the Germans care - if they took it seriously, they didn’t take the MAP tensely (well, yes, they suffered some losses - but so the war same), though they didn’t tuck into the TsMAP (not counting of course the "dashing" raid of the 10th flotilla). Well, if it were all together, or they would have suffered heavy losses, or, again, they would not have climbed all - in the end the Baltic Fleet was not particularly interested in them, they already carried out all their tasks in the Baltic - (there were not so many tasks - ore is transported from Sweden without any problems, and okay)
          2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            21 November 2017 12: 21 New
            +1
            Quote: Alexey RA
            And have we ever had a fight at the MAP?

            Nuuuu, Albion was very close to that
  9. The Siberian barber
    The Siberian barber 20 November 2017 23: 30 New
    +2
    Andrey, thank you more!
    With great pleasure I read your works, I look forward to new ones!)
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      21 November 2017 09: 46 New
      +1
      And thank you for your kind words!
  10. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 21 November 2017 12: 01 New
    +3
    Thanks for the interesting stuff. It would be interesting to predict the events if instead of “Glory” they sent “Andrew the First-Called” and “Emperor Paul I”. They even had 8-inch guns fired at 95 kbl, 12-inch guns at 110. Then the Germans would not have felt so comfortable in this operation. In the RIF there was another ship that could shoot at a distance of more than 110 kbl. This is the Rurik armored cruiser. But his sending to Irben is even more unlikely. Plus to the voiced German losses, you can add the new German destroyer "S-31", which was blown up on a Russian mine in the Gulf of Riga with the loss of 11 crew members. On our side the gunboats "Koreets" and "Sivuch" were sunk.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      21 November 2017 12: 20 New
      +7
      Quote: VohaAhov
      Thanks for the interesting stuff.

      And thank you!
      Quote: VohaAhov
      It would be interesting to predict the events if instead of “Glory” they sent “Andrew the First-Called” and “Emperor Paul I”.

      Definitely. I would, firstly, sincerely sympathize with the battleships of the 4th squadron, take a chance to stick there. On the other hand ... Upon learning of Andrews, they could immediately abandon the dreadnoughts. In any case, it would have been interesting.
      Quote: VohaAhov
      Plus to the voiced German losses, you can add the new German destroyer "S-31", which was blown up on a Russian mine in the Gulf of Riga with the loss of 11 crew members.

      Yes, but this happened only later, and of the three fights of Glory that took place in 1915, so far only two have been described. So I’ll definitely mention it! hi
      1. Rurikovich
        Rurikovich 21 November 2017 21: 25 New
        +1
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Upon learning of Andrews, they could immediately abandon the dreadnoughts. In any case, it would have been interesting.

        Theoretically, an amusing picture what With equal firing range, the “Andrei” could be kept under fire by German minesweepers, not allowing them to work, but the German dreadnought could no longer get behind minesweepers. Although at such battle distances excellent SADO and artillery training were needed. Although the psychological effect is more important here ...
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          22 November 2017 13: 24 New
          +2
          Quote: Rurikovich
          Although at such battle distances you need excellent SUAO and artillery training

          The question here is that I just can’t figure out what exactly stood on the “Glory”. At point blank I don’t see the information that they equipped it with Geisler arr 1910. And without this the possibility of “Glory” is much more modest than “Andrei”, because Geisler stood exactly on “Andrei” and “Pavel” 1910
          1. Rurikovich
            Rurikovich 22 November 2017 20: 13 New
            +1
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            The question here is that I just can’t figure out what exactly stood on the “Glory”. Point blank I don’t see the info that she was equipped with Geisler arr 1910

            Maybe they didn’t change anything. request If there was something specific, then I think the information would be. I understand that you are guided by Vinogradov's monograph on "Glory"?
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              22 November 2017 21: 04 New
              +1
              Basically - yes, still Melnikov, of course
              1. Rurikovich
                Rurikovich 22 November 2017 21: 15 New
                +1
                Same trouble request Yes, it’s a pity that you have to rejoice at what you can get to. That would be in the technical documentation of the archives .... winked repeat
  11. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 21 November 2017 14: 07 New
    +2
    [quote = Andrey from Chelyabinsk] [quote = VohaAkhov] Thanks for the most interesting material. [/ quote]
    And thank you!
    [quote = VohaAkhov] It would be interesting to predict the events if instead of “Glory” they sent “Andrew the First-Called” and “Emperor Paul I”. [/ quote]
    Definitely. I would, firstly, sincerely sympathize with the battleships of the 4th squadron, take a chance to stick there. On the other hand ... Upon learning of Andrews, they could immediately abandon the dreadnoughts. In any case, it would have been interesting.
    [quote = VohaAkhov] Plus to the voiced German losses, you can add the new German destroyer "S-31", which was blown up on a Russian mine in the Gulf of Riga with the loss of 11 crew members. [/ quote]
    Yes, but this happened only later, and of the three fights of Glory that took place in 1915, so far only two have been described. So I’ll definitely mention it! hi[/ Quote
    Then, probably, it is worth mentioning the legendary Novik battle with the German destroyers V-99 and V-100 with the sinking of the first.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      21 November 2017 14: 10 New
      +4
      Quote: VohaAhov
      Then, probably, it is worth mentioning the legendary Novik battle with the German destroyers V-99 and V-100 with the sinking of the first.

      Of course! But he went on the night of August 3 to 4, and he still hasn’t reached it :)
  12. Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 24 November 2017 12: 04 New
    +1
    very interesting! waiting for continuation
  13. unknown
    unknown 25 November 2017 01: 20 New
    0
    It's funny how it all depends on the political moment. Even the technical parameters. Glory shells in WWI are no longer considered "light", unlike the REV. And no one pays attention to the fact that the shells of German armadillos have a mass of 240 kg, which is not much more than that of Peresvet. That is, in RPE shells weighing 225 kg are considered insufficient for action on armadillos, and in PMV 240 kg a projectile works normally on armadillos.
    REV - unreliable war. It’s a pity if the same story opens with PMV
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      25 November 2017 08: 53 New
      +4
      Quote: ignoto
      It's funny how it all depends on the political moment.

      I look at whom it hurts about, that one speaks about that.
      Quote: ignoto
      Glory shells in WWI are no longer considered "light", unlike the REV.

      Weights are given. What does not suit you?
      Quote: ignoto
      And no one pays attention to the fact that the shells of German armadillos have a mass of 240 kg, which is not much more than that of Peresvet. That is, in RPE shells weighing 225 kg are considered insufficient for action on armadillos, and in PMV 240 kg a projectile works normally on armadillos.

      That is, the difference between the RNE, with its effective combat distance of 2-4 miles and the flat path of the projectiles, and the MAP battle at a distance of 9-10 miles with the fall of shells at a large angle to the horizon (as discussed separately) and the ability to hit decks You are not able to see.
      Continue to enjoy the political moment :)))
      1. unknown
        unknown 25 November 2017 10: 23 New
        0
        Incorrect statement of the answer. The mass of shells are given. There are obsolete armadillos on both sides. Namely the generations of the so-called RPN. So-called because, apparently, everything is not in order with the chronology, or rather, everything is not in order, but now it’s not about that. The mass of the shell "Glory" has not changed from the REV. Then, she was "considered" insufficient. The ships grew to the WWI, the caliber and the mass of shells, too. And lo! Already no one writes that the shells are "light." How so? As far as I remember, the “Peresvet” elevation angle was greater than the standard 15 degrees, that is, their shells could also fall at a large angle to the horizon. And then what is 225 kg of a shell worse than 240 kg? For the Japanese, it was too much. Your description of the so-called Tsushima battle: the Asama cruiser, supposedly the most perfect creation among armored cruisers, was put out of action after two 10 "shells hit the rear of the (!) Armored deck.
        2-4 miles - is it 20-40 cable? It was at such a distance that the battles of the REV took place?
        But what about the tales of the Japanese fire at a greater distance?
        According to the traditional, completely literary version, Russia lost the so-called RYAV, therefore, historiography has taken all Russian weapons and equipment to groan, and to exalt the Japanese (the essence of English). Not surprisingly, the traditional version was written in the 50s by the British. It is strange that this trend did not spill over into the PMV. Probably because of the proximity of the October Revolution. Which is not known for certain. Either the literary reflection of the November Revolution in Germany, or the Left Socialist Revolution of 1927. In any case, the revolutionaries needed new tales.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          25 November 2017 11: 00 New
          +4
          Look, there is no spring, but there is an aggravation.
          Quote: ignoto
          And lo! Already no one writes that the shells are "light." How so?

          "Miracle" - this is your enchanting illiteracy. Russia for its dreadnoughts took 470,9 kg shell. And for armadillos that were not able to take such shells, so-called shells were created sample 1907 google what it was :)) Hint - if the Russians in Tsuim had THESE shells, I don’t envy it :)))
          Quote: ignoto
          As far as I remember, the “Peresvet” elevation angle was greater than the standard 15 degrees, that is, their shells could also fall at a large angle to the horizon.

          Though something is true
          Quote: ignoto
          And then what is 225 kg of a shell worse than 240 kg?

          And who said that he is worse? No worse. Only here is one nuance - the Russian sailors of the RPE did not know how to shoot for 8-9 miles.
          Quote: ignoto
          2-4 miles - is it 20-40 cable? It was at such a distance that the battles of the REV took place?

          Yes.
          Quote: ignoto
          But what about the tales of the Japanese fire at a greater distance?

          Tales are
          Quote: ignoto
          Not surprisingly, the traditional version was written in the 50s by the British.

          Another victim of a new chronology ...
  14. dustycat
    dustycat 27 November 2017 14: 13 New
    0
    Quote: Alexey RA
    The most plausible option is the notorious budget savings.

    Most likely ordinary corruption: they didn’t agree who would send the budget money to anyone (especially in the form of an expensive and senseless modernization project), they began to red tape, and then ... wow ... war ...
    And to whom how and how much to cut the budget did not agree.
    Yes, and someone must have lobbied for modernization in English or American shipyards.
    English clubs were very popular in the Admiralty and the Friends Club of England decided a lot.
  15. Olezhek
    Olezhek 13 December 2017 11: 16 New
    0
    Not bad. Honored ...
  16. Mista_dj
    Mista_dj 2 January 2018 09: 50 New
    +1
    Andrew, thank you!
    Great topic!
  17. Chief Officer
    Chief Officer 2 January 2018 10: 02 New
    +1
    Love the stuff!
    I look forward to continuing!